View Poll Results: Why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

Voters
136. You may not vote on this poll
  • It's just a coincidence, an accident of economics.

    1 0.74%
  • These are just lies fed to us by the liberal media!

    3 2.21%
  • Yes, certain socialized programs DO benefit a democracy's economic health.

    132 97.06%
Page 3 of 21 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 201

Thread: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

  1. #21
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    When you say "false", you should show precisely how it is that there are any first-world democracies who do not have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation. AND you should show how there are any nations that DO have small government, low effective taxes, and weak (or no) regulation are not third-world nations.

    And btw - did I say that first-world nations ARE socialist? No. They are socialized democracies, meaning that they ALL have integrated into their governments programs which are socialist in nature. My points stand.
    None of your points stand. Those economies that are most economically free tend to be the wealthiest, and those that are least economically free tend to be the poorest.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  2. #22
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,152

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    It's in how First World vs. Third world is defined. It's a flexible definition, and usually "first world" automatically includes the US and Britain.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  3. #23
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    I understand what you're trying to say - I really do. All I'm doing, though, is pointing out what has already happened. If, as conservative dogma claims, the socialist programs that are now an integral part of our governments were so bad for our economies, then why are our economies the best in recorded human history? I'm not asking for rhetoric - I'm asking those who oppose the social programs to explain why it is that, if programs such as Medicare, free public schools, and so forth are SO bad for a nation's economy, why it is that all the most successful democracies on the planet - the 'first-world democracies' - are the same ones that have had those socialist programs for multiple generations?

    Please explain their success in the face of what conservative (and libertarian) dogma claims should have happened.
    Such economies were the best before the implementation of such programs, and remain so only in spite of them not because of them.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  4. #24
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    I'm guessing you've never actually talked to a socialist.
    Sure. Talk to them here on the forum, in real life, I also read their works.


    I'm guessing you are now going to adopt the No True Socialist Fallacy to explain that those socialists aren't real socialists, socialism is a magical unicorn that poops leprechauns and access to the means of production for everyone, and have never been found, which is why none of Socialisms' failures can be held against it .

  5. #25
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:21 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,307

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    It is, of course, relatively expensive to maintain the rules of complex societies. But probably government spending in democracies is too high because they require some adjustments. They allow governments to do many things that are not public goods, because they sound like things governments should do though economics says governments do them badly.

  6. #26
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,078

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    because making sure that the poor are able to participate in the economy is good for the economy, and the additional demand creates jobs. also, making sure that basic needs are met for everyone means a more stable society, which is also good for business.

    like anything else (including tax cuts,) you have to find the right balance, though. dropping the top rate from 91 percent to 70 did a lot of good. however, when you start talking about cutting already historically low rates, the returns are increasingly diminishing. likewise, we might be able to solve some problems by sending everyone to college debt free and guaranteeing debt free access to health care, but making the minimum wage forty grand just isn't going to do much except result in massive inflation and a huge hit to anyone with savings. same thing with regulation. same thing with our stupidly high corporate tax rate. you have to find the balance.

  7. #27
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,508

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    As used, both "Democracy" and "Socialist" are grossly incorrect terms and I dislike them being used in such a manner. It allows the user to take a shortcut to being able to defend their position, since it allows the user to re-interpret the terms as they see fit. You set forth some parameters for discussion, but some of the primary ones are poorly used and done so in such a way as to allow you to define them "on the fly" to counter arguments against your point. This isn't semantics, it's wanting clear parameters for discussion. It's wanting all of us to be on the same page, using the same terms to mean the same thing, so that we can have an intelligent discussion, instead of one that gets to get redefined at will.
    Like I said, quibbling over semantics and nothing more.

    America, the major nations of the former British Commonwealth, Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea, France, Germany (and the rest of most of Western Europe) all have certain things in common, one of which is that they are all representative democracies...and they are all part of what is termed the first world, where third-world level poverty is generally unknown.

    You know what I am saying. Why is it that these nations, these representative democracies - or whatever label you want to put on them, they still share many governmental similarities - are still the most successful nations in human history when it comes to the strength of their economies, the stability of their governments, and the standard of living of their respective populations.

    Why is that? Why are they - in the light of human history - so wildly successful, when ALL of them have had included as integral parts of their governments patently socialist programs that touch every corner of their societies?

    Why?
    “To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  8. #28
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,508

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    because making sure that the poor are able to participate in the economy is good for the economy, and the additional demand creates jobs. also, making sure that basic needs are met for everyone means a more stable society, which is also good for business.

    like anything else (including tax cuts,) you have to find the right balance, though. dropping the top rate from 91 percent to 70 did a lot of good. however, when you start talking about cutting already historically low rates, the returns are increasingly diminishing. likewise, we might be able to solve some problems by sending everyone to college debt free and guaranteeing debt free access to health care, but making the minimum wage forty grand just isn't going to do much except result in massive inflation and a huge hit to anyone with savings. same thing with regulation. same thing with our stupidly high corporate tax rate. you have to find the balance.
    I've said the same thing many times - the 'Goldilocks' solution. Neither too much, nor too little...moderation in everything. But the devil's in the details of finding exactly what that balance is, isn't it?
    “To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  9. #29
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,508

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    The premise of the OP is quite obviously and observably false. America was the first and original first-world nation, and for a very long time, by far the greatest example of such, and we did not become so by pursuing destructive socialist/statist/collectivist polices, but by rejecting and rebelling against such policies. To the degree that America has declined away from its former status as the preeminent first-world-nation, this decline has been driven almost entirely by our foolish adoption of these sort of policies. The end result of such policies can most clearly be seen in the history of the Союз Советских Социалистических Республик and its ultimate collapse—not exactly the epitome of a thriving first-world nation.
    Methinks thou needest learn some history. We did indeed have the best of the best in the two decades after WWII...but before WWII, we were still in many ways playing catch-up to much of Western Europe, especially England.
    “To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  10. #30
    Living in Gods country


    JANFU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    17,827

    Re: So...why are all first-world democracies, socialized democracies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    There are three observations:

    (1) ALL first-world democracies are generally socialized, and have big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation, whereas
    (2) NO first-world nations at all meet the conservative demands of zero socialism, small government, low taxes, and weak (if any) regulation. And
    (3) ALL nations which DO have small governments, low taxes, and weak regulations ARE third-world nations.

    If including socialist programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Head Start, free public schools and the like are (as conservative pundits claim) a sure way to the economic dustbin of history, why is it that America (and the British Commonwealth before us) started down this road eighty years ago (FDR's New Deal) and we've been the most successful nations in human history? Is it just an accident or coincidence? Or does the inclusion of such socialist programs actually contribute to a nation's economic health?
    Are these not a natural progression as a democracy grows, economy expands and a society matures?
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Hillary is the only defense I or anyone else needs.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Not once have I showed my dick to a woman and she thought it was creepy. In fact, in 100% of the cases, they were pretty excited about it. I don't know who you're showing your **** too.

Page 3 of 21 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •